Nordyke v. King Amicus Brief

At issue: Challenging county ordinance prohibiting possession of firearms and ammunition on county-owned property. This action was brought by gun show promoters to challenge on Second Amendment and other grounds an Alameda County ordinance prohibiting the possession of firearms and ammunition on county-owned property. Following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in McDonald v. Chicago, 130 S.Ct. 3020 (2010) (holding that the Amendment applies against state and local governments), the Ninth Circuit panel requested additional briefing addressing the impact of the McDonald decision on this litigation.

Law Center’s Brief: Our brief, filed in support of Alameda County, proposes a rubric for the type of scrutiny to be applied when evaluating Second Amendment claims. This proposed rule is derived from the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment cases and other areas of constitutional law. Where a law directly or significantly burdens the Second Amendment right to possess a firearm in the home for self-defense, the brief argues, a court should apply the “intermediate scrutiny” standard of review. The brief concludes that the Alameda County ordinance does not significantly burden the exercise of the Second Amendment, but that even if it did, the ordinance would satisfy intermediate scrutiny. The court opted to apply the “substantial burden” framework, and concluded that the gun show ban at issue does not substantially burden a Second Amendment right and “properly dismissed” the Second Amendment claim.